New Climategate SHOCKER: Russians Reveal How CPU "Cooked The Books"

In Copenhagen the gathering of the International Church of Global Warming Moonbats is ignoring the Climategate scandal as they do their best to pass their agenda of transferring of income from the developed to the undeveloped world.

While the Moonbats were playing a denial Climategate got much, much bigger. The Russians just dropped this huge bombshell just as the world’s big-shots are gathering in Copenhagen to discuss ways of carbon-taxing the developed world back into the stone-age. What the Russians found out is that Dr, Jones and the folks at CPU weren't using all the data from Siberia.  In fact they threw out all of the Russian Data except for the 25% that helped them prove their case.Read this from the RIA Novisti Newswire (H/T James Delingpole)

Russia affected by Climategate
A discussion of the November 2009 Climatic Research Unit e-mail hacking incident, referred to by some sources as "Climategate," continues against the backdrop of the abortive UN Climate Conference in Copenhagen (COP15) discussing alternative agreements to replace the 1997 Kyoto Protocol that aimed to combat global warming.

The incident involved an e-mail server used by the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA) in Norwich, East England. Unknown persons stole and anonymously disseminated thousands of e-mails and other documents dealing with the global-warming issue made over the course of 13 years.

Controversy arose after various allegations were made including that climate scientists colluded to withhold scientific evidence and manipulated data to make the case for global warming appear stronger than it is.

Climategate has already affected Russia. On Tuesday, the Moscow-based Institute of Economic Analysis (IEA) issued a report claiming that the Hadley Center for Climate Change based at the headquarters of the British Meteorological Office in Exeter (Devon, England) had probably tampered with Russian-climate data.

The IEA believes that Russian meteorological-station data did not substantiate the anthropogenic global-warming theory.

Analysts say Russian meteorological stations cover most of the country's territory, and that the Hadley Center had used data submitted by only 25% of such stations in its reports.

Over 40% of Russian territory was not included in global-temperature calculations for some other reasons, rather than the lack of meteorological stations and observations.

The data of stations located in areas not listed in the Hadley Climate Research Unit Temperature UK (HadCRUT) survey often does not show any substantial warming in the late 20th century and the early 21st century.

The HadCRUT database includes specific stations providing incomplete data and highlighting the global-warming process, rather than stations facilitating uninterrupted observations.

On the whole, climatologists use the incomplete findings of meteorological stations far more often than those providing complete observations.

IEA analysts say climatologists use the data of stations located in large populated centers that are influenced by the urban-warming effect more frequently than the correct data of remote stations.

The scale of global warming was exaggerated due to temperature distortions for Russia accounting for 12.5% of the world's land mass. The IEA said it was necessary to recalculate all global-temperature data in order to assess the scale of such exaggeration.

Global-temperature data will have to be modified if similar climate-date procedures have been used from other national data because the calculations used by COP15 analysts, including financial calculations, are based on HadCRUT research.

 Oh how does it tie in to climate-gate? Read this Email from the Climategate files, Doctor Jones suppressed the data:

From: Phil Jones To: "Michael E. Mann"
Subject: Re: have you seen this?
Date: Wed Mar 31 09:09:04 2004

Mike,
Yes, but not had a chance to read it yet. Too much else going on. Ed has a paper
reworking Esper et al. as you'll know. If you're going to Tucson, I suggest you talk to
Keith about it then - don't email him as he's too busy preparing to go and marking essays.
Jan is in one of our EU projects. Seems that Keith thinks Jan is reinventing a lot of
Keith's work, renamed the RCS method and much more. Jan doesn't always take in what is in the literature even though he purports to read it. He's now looking at homogenization
techniques for temperature to check the Siberian temperature data. We keep telling him the decline is also in N. Europe, N. America (where we use all the recently homogenized Canadian data). The decline may be slightly larger in Siberia, but it is elsewhere as well. Also Siberia is one of the worst places to look at homogeneity, as the stations aren't that close together (as they are in Fennoscandia and most of Canada) and also the temperature varies an awful lot from year to year.
 Recently rejected two papers (one for JGR and for GRL) from people saying CRU has it
wrong over Siberia. Went to town in both reviews, hopefully successfully. If either appears I will be very surprised, but you never know with GRL.

Cheers
Phil
Cheers
Phil
At 11:20 30/03/2004 -0500, you wrote:

Phil,
Have you seen this piece of crap by Esper?
The JGR paper, which Scott is supposed to be finalizing, demonstrates quite convincingly
that the greater amplitude of Esper et al is due to spatial and seasonal sampling,
mike
______________________________________________________________
Professor Michael E. Mann
Department of Environmental Sciences, Clark Hall
University of Virginia
Charlottesville, VA 22903
_______________________________________________________________________
e-mail: mann@xxxxxxxxx.xxx Phone: (434) 924-7770 FAX: (434) 982-2137
[1]http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/faculty/people/mann.shtml

Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
University of East Anglia
Norwich Email p.jones@xxxxxxxxx.xxx
NR4 7TJ
UK

 This is as close to a smoking gun as we have so far.

CIVIL WAR!!: Progressive Democrats REVOLT

You would think that during the Holiday Season  politicians would try to have the Christmas "Peace on Earth, Goodwill Toward Man" spirit, but not this year. The fighting going on in the Beltway is totally disgusting.  I am not talking about the traditional Democrat vs. Republican Partisanship, no this is all about the brewing Democrat vs. Democrat Civil War.

The anger over the recent dropping of the medicare and public options is real, extreme and very public.

"Insurance companies win," DailyKos founder Markos Moulitsas declared Tuesday. "Time to kill this monstrosity coming out of the Senate."

If healthcare reform ultimately crashes and burns – which most experts still consider unlikely -- it will ironically stem not from Republican opposition but rather Democrats' inability to stave off an insurgency within their own caucus.

And people are even attacking the POTUS, hinting that its time for him to "Man UP"

Snowe? Stupak? Lieberman? Who left these people in charge?" firebrand progressive Rep. Anthony Weiner, D-N.Y., declared in a statement released Tuesday. "It's time for the president to get his hands dirty.

"Some of us," Weiner continued, "have compromised our compromised compromise. We need the president to stand up for the values our party shares. We must stop letting the tail wag the dog of this debate."

Even Crazy Rollie, Roland Burris, the man who temporarily holds Obama's old Senate seat:

Controversial Illinois Sen. Roland W. Burris of Illinois is the latest to balk at the compromise. Speaking on the floor of the Senate Tuesday, he said: “My colleagues may have forged a compromise bill that can achieve the 60 votes that will be needed for it to pass. But until this bill addresses cost, competition and accountability in a meaningful way, it will not win mine."

Some are suggesting Burris' tough stance is political payback for the Obama administration's opposition to his re-election hopes.

Perhaps the biggest battle is between two old enemies, progressive former party leader, Howard Dean (ousted by Obama after rebuilding the party and winning the election), and Press Secretary Robert Gibbs.

Dean has been on a rampage since the Medicare and Public Options were dropped. He is urging people to Kill the bill and start over:

According to Jake Tapper Senior White House officials began to more aggressively dispute criticisms of Democratic Senate health care reform legislation from former Democratic National Committee chairman Dr. Howard Dean Wednesday, saying the former Vermont governor made arguments that “simply weren’t true” and “flat-out wrong.”


On "Good Morning America" this morning, Dean argued that the bill's mandate that individuals obtain health insurance, while not offering a government-run public health care option, means the bill is "an insurance company's dream."


“If this is an insurance company's dream, I think the insurance companies have yet to get the memo,” White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said at his daily briefing. “Insurance companies have spent hundreds of millions of dollars lobbying against this legislation… If this is such a good deal for them, I'm not entirely sure why they're fighting it.”

On Vermont Public Radio Tuesday, Dean called for Democratic senators to kill the bill.


"I don't think any rational person would say killing a bill makes any sense at this point,” Gibbs said today.


Asked why he thought Dean was making the arguments he’s making, Gibbs said, “I can’t tell what his motives are.” He said the Senate legislation was essentially what Dean “campaigned for in 2004” but better.

Don't forget that Gibbs, who worked for the presidential campaign of John "why the long face" Kerry, and Governor Dean are not the best of friends. In 2004, Gibbs left the Kerry campaign and helped run a 527 organization whose only purpose was   defeating Dean, “Americans for Jobs, Healthcare & Progressive Values,” which ran a TV ad in Iowa depicting Osama bin Laden with the voice-over narration, “Howard Dean just cannot compete with George Bush on foreign policy.")

The 2004 presidential candidate told George Stephanopoulos on GMA that "there are some good things in this bill. The problem is, we're now committed to a solution using the private insurance companies. And you will be forced to buy insurance. If you don't, you'll pay a fine. And 27% of the money that you put in will not go to your health care. It will go to CEOs, who make $20 million a year. This is a bigger bailout for the insurance industry than AIG."


Dean added that he doesn't "believe there's going to be the money around in five years... because the insurance companies are charging so much.” He said a provision in the legislation prohibited insurance companies from denying coverage to individuals based on pre-existing conditions “has disappeared essentially. The fine print in this bill allows that insurance companies charge you three-times as much if you're older than they do if you're younger.”


Said Gibbs, “I don't know what piece of legislation he's reading.”


Gibbs offered a detailed rebuttal of Dean’s assertions, saying “nobody will be required to purchase something they can't afford. There are hardship exemptions and subsidies based on income levels that help people afford insurance.”


Dean said that 27% of the fine imposed on those who don’t have insurance “will go to CEOs who make $20 million a year.”


“I don't have the slightest idea where the fact of 27 percent came from,” Gibbs said, adding that Dean “went on later in the interview to discuss the notion that legislation…no longer contains anything that addresses pre-existing conditions. That's simply flat-out wrong. Later in the interview, he said that he didn't see any cost control in the bill, when every health economist that's evaluated the bill says that any idea that's out there to contain costs is actually contained in the bill.”


Earlier today, White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer posted a blog item calling Dean's argument "somewhat perplexing" given that the "insurance industry has been leveraging its considerable resources in a ferocious effort to defeat this bill, including producing a report the day before the Senate Finance Committee vote that was so misleading the firm behind it had to walk away from it."


Pfeiffer claimed that among the many provisions in the bill are those “to end insurer abuses, lower premiums, and hold insurance companies accountable.” Moreover, he said, insurance reforms “will prohibit abuses such as denying coverage for pre-existing conditions, charging exorbitant premiums based on gender, age, or health status, dropping coverage when people are sick, and imposing lifetime limits on benefits.”


Dean said on GMA that in Washington, DC, "passing any bill is a victory. And that's the problem. Decisions are made about the long-term future in this country for short-term political reasons."

 Come on Boys, Can't We All Just Get Along?

Et Tu MSNBC ? The Olbermann Network's Latest Poll Joins Others Showing Obamacare Opposition

I wonder if MSNBC's professional moonbat Keith Olbermann is going to give his own  network that worst person in the world designation. Today, the most "in the tank for Obama" network released a poll that showed most people in the country are against Obamacare and public opinion is sinking quickly.

As the Senate sprints to pass a health-care bill by Christmas, the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll finds that those believing President Obama's health-reform plan is a good idea has sunk to its lowest level. Just 32 percent say it's a good idea, versus 47 percent who say it's a bad idea. In addition, for the first time in the survey, a plurality prefers the status quo to reform. By a 44-41 percent margin, respondents say it would be better to keep the current system than to pass Obama's health plan.

By comparison, in September's and October's NBC/Journal polls, the American public preferred changing the system to the status quo, 45 to 39 percent.

But if the maestro of moonbattery is going to to pick on his home network, he will also attack the many other outlets that released bad news for Obamacare polls over the past two days:

• A new Washington Post-ABC News poll found that Americans are generally fearful that a revamped health-care system would bring higher costs and worse care. Fifty-one percent of poll respondents said they oppose the proposed changes for the health-care system, while 44% said they support the proposals from Congress and the White House.

•  Gallup: a new USA Today/Galluppoll finds public support for such efforts still below the majority level. Forty-six percent of Americans say they would advise their member of Congress to vote for healthcare legislation (or lean toward doing so), while 48% would advise a no vote (or lean in that direction).
  
  
  

Support had been at or above 50% in September and early October, but slumped to 43% by early November. It has recovered somewhat since then but remains below the earlier levels.

• On Monday, Rasmussen's latest poll of voters about Obamacare reports 56% of voters are opposed which ties the record low. Along with 56% opposition of Obamacare Rasmussen finds that just 40% of voters favor the health care plan. The passion of the opposition is fierce, 46% strongly oppose Obamacare, only 19% who strongly favor it.
  

“The most significant detail in the data is that 63% of senior citizens oppose the plan, including 52% who strongly oppose it,” says Scott Rasmussen, president of Rasmussen Reports. “Seniors are significant in this debate both because they use the health care system more than anyone else and because they vote more than younger voters.”

Gee, it looks like all the polls are showing that America hates Obamacare. Maybe Olbermann will choose the entire American Population as the worst people in the world. Oh wait, like most progressives, he already does.

Little Chucky Schumer, US Senator is an Embarrassment

I have been sitting on this for all day, trying to figure out a nice way to say this but I can't find one. Chuck Schumer is an embarrassment. I am embarrassed that he is my senator, I am embarrassed that he is a public American Figure, I am embarrassed that he is a public Jewish figure...every time I see him on TV and he starts to open his mouth I cringe. The man does not care about the United States he is 100% partisan. If Elijah the Prophet showed up to announce the coming of the Messiah today (Please God), Schumer would ask Elijah if he was a Democrat or a Republican. And party is only Schumer's second priority his first priority is Chuck Schumer.


Last night Schumer embarrassed NY again when he had a childish hissy fit on an Airplane, even called the flight attendant a bitch when he was asked to  turn off his phone and comply with FCC rules 

Sen. Chuck Schumer had harsh words for a flight attendant who told him to turn off his phone for takeoff. "Bitch!" the senior senator was overheard Sunday saying to his hand-picked seat-mate Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand after arguing with a flight attendant that he should not have to obey Federal Aviation Administration rules. Schumer's office later admitted to Politico.com that he said it -- but the poll-challenged Gillibrand, who has been strongly backed by Schumer against potential rivals, declined to confirm it and even called his behavior "polite."

I would love to understand what Gillibrand would call impolite. Of course first I would like to know exactly who she is.  Oh wait she is our other senator.

The altercation, reported by Politico's Anne Schroeder Mullins, occurred Sunday on the US Airways shuttle from NY to Washington. Schumer and Gillibrand were chatting on their phones when the captain told people to shut them off, as required under FAA rules. The two senators ignored the captain and kept talking, which prompted a flight attendant to ask them to comply, according to a House Republican aide sitting nearby.Schumer asked if he could finish his conversation and the flight attendant "no," that the entire plane was waiting for him to wrap up his conversation. Schumer ended his call but launched into an argument with the flight attendant saying that he was entitled to continue talking until the cabin door was closed. The flight attendant pointed out that he is supposed to turn his phone off when told."He argued with her about the rule," Politico quotes the aide as saying. "She said she doesn't make the rules, she just follows them."

 Maybe the flight attendant didn't know there were two sets of rule, one for the "common folk" the other for self-centered childish politicians. The rule happens to be the flight attendant is not allowed to close the the door until the phone and  other electronics are turned off. On the other hand how could one expect Schumer to know anything about the law, just because he is an attorney who job is to create law.

When the flight attendant walked away, Schumer turned to his junior senator and called the flight attendant a "bitch." Schumer office didn't respond to requests for comment from The Post. His aide, Brian Fallon, told Politico, "The senator made an off-the-cuff comment under his breath that he shouldn’t have made, and he regrets it.

It is not known whether little Chucky Schumer followed up with placing his out stretched hands near his ears saying "Nah nah nah nah." But judging by the maturity of the NY Senator it was entirely possible. We learned a bit more about Gillibrand's integrity as she defended Schumer's use of the word, saying the senior senator was "polite" and that he "turned off his phone when asked to.

Moments later after the flight attendant ordered Schumer's phone off, it rang again. Unfazed that he had been caught once again disobeying FAA rules, the entitled senator looked at the caller ID and said: "It's Harry Reid calling. I guess health care will have to wait until we land."

Little Chucky Schumer is the type of politician that feels he is above the Law.Its hard to understand why an attorney and US Senator would act so childish. Maybe he had a horrible childhood.  Who knows, maybe poor Chucky Schumer was breast feed through falsies or something like that.  Or maybe he has just gotten a bit too big for his pacifier.

Iran Ups the Nuclear Ante: Fires Sophisticated Missile

Twice In the past four days Iran has thumbed its nose to President Obama and the international community's effort to prevent the terrorist regime from developing nuclear weapons.

Documents uncovered a few days ago show Iran is working on a neutron initiator, a key component of a nuclear bomb.  that There is no peaceful purpose for the initiator.

Today Iran fired its most sophisticated missile a high-speed surface-to-surface Sajjil-2 missile (sajjil means baked clay).

Iran announced Wednesday it has successfully test fired an upgraded version of its longest-range, solid-fuel missile which it said is faster and harder to shoot down.


State television broke the news in a one-sentence report accompanied by a brief clip of the test.


Defense Minister Gen. Ahmad Vahidi later spoke on television, describing the Sajjil-2 as a high-speed, surface-to-surface missile that would serve as a "strong deterrent" against any possible foreign attack.

"Given its high speed," he said, "it is impossible to destroy the missile with anti-missile systems because of its radar-evading ability."

The Sajjil-2 is a two-stage missile with a range of about 1,200 miles. That range places Israel, Iran's sworn enemy, well within reach and reaches as far away as southeastern Europe with greater precision than earlier models.

It is Iran's most advanced two-stage missile and is powered entirely by solid-fuel while the older, long-range Shahab-3 missile uses a combination of solid and liquid fuel in its most advanced form.

"Given its high speed," he said, "it is impossible to destroy the missile with anti-missile systems because of its radar-evading ability."

The Sajjil-2 is a two-stage missile with a range of about 1,200 miles. That range places Israel, Iran's sworn enemy, well within reach and reaches as far away as southeastern Europe with greater precision than earlier models.

It is Iran's most advanced two-stage missile and is powered entirely by solid-fuel while the older, long-range Shahab-3 missile uses a combination of solid and liquid fuel in its most advanced form.

The name "Sajjil" means "baked clay," a reference to a story in the Koran, Islam's holy book, in which birds sent by God drive off an enemy army attacking the holy city of Mecca by pelting them with stones of baked clay.

Baked Clay or Baked Earth? All the evidence points to the fact that Iran is building a bomb (see video)  and the US is getting snookered. And through our appeasement, Iran is getting closer and closer to a nuclear weapon.










hhh